Buying a 65” TV in 2016 and Avoiding Smart TVs

By James Wallace Harris, Wednesday, July 27, 2016

I’ve been rethinking HDTVs. Buying a TV should be simple – but it’s not. There’s too much technology to compare, too many standards, too great of a price range, and too many options to consider. Psychologically, it’s hard to think about spending $3,000 for a TV set, when I can remember being a teen in 1964 wishing I could buy a Ford Mustang. Back then, the Mustang had a list price of $2,368. Then, and now, a big color TV is about 1/10th the price of a car. It hurts to spend that much.

I’ve been wanting a new 65” HDTV. My old 56” DLP Samsung is ten years old and the picture is only good when it’s dark outside. I’m on my third replacement lamp. I’ve been shopping for a new, slightly larger, much brighter, 4K HDR HDTV. When I pick out all the technical features I want, I end up lusting after a 65” Samsung SUHDTV that runs $2999 at Best Buy. More than I want to spend. Best Buy also has a 65” Vizio E65U-D3 for $999. What does shelling out $2,000 more actually get me?

CNET claims the Vizio P-series ($1,999) has one of the best pictures around, and the cheaper M-series ($1,499) is almost as good. However, Vizio’s new design at first turned me off. They don’t come with a tuner or smart TV features. Instead they supply an android tablet to stream shows. My first impression – that’s a stupid idea. Then I saw the genius of their madness. They’re designing televisions for how people use them. Most kids love streaming content. It wasn’t until I got home that I realized I stream most of my shows from a Roku 3, and I by-pass the built-in tuner of my existing set because I have a TiVo Roamio, with four tuners.

A flash of understanding came to me. All I want from a HDTV is for it to be a monitor. I don’t care about smart TV features, 3D, curved screens, speakers, fancy options, zillions of inputs/outputs, or most of the other gimmicks. I don’t need a tuner. All I need is a screen, a cord for power, and one HDMI 2.0a HDCP 2.2 input. Just like a computer monitor. Maybe a Ethernet jack to update the firmware, but there might be a route around that too. And Vizio, I don’t want your tablet, which pushes me towards your E-series, but I prefer the tech specs on the P & M series. (It’s a shame the E-series isn’t just a M-series without a tablet.)

I have a component system. A/V receiver with multiple HDMI inputs and one HDMI output, Roku, Blu-ray and TiVo. All the intelligence I need are in those devices. The TV needs no smarts. I know there are people who buy a smart TV to do everything, but I’m not one of them. I prefer an external Roku. I considered TCL’s new Roku TV, but it doesn’t support HDR, and I’m not sure it’s built-in Roku can be upgraded. If the Roku released an upgrade to the Roku 4, or comes out with the Roku 5, that supports the emerging HDR standards, Dolby Vision or HDR 10, or the Ultra HD Premium standard, I can just buy a new Roku box.

All I want is a screen that’s fantastic, with full screen back lighting, instead of edge lighting. HDR is more important than 4K, but I want 4K to be ready for the future. The Vizio M-series would be great, if it didn’t come with that stupid Android tablet. Why pay extra for a mediocre tablet? I’ve already got an iPhone 6s Plus and a Nexus 7. I don’t think I’d ever stream from a tablet anyway. I bought a Chromecast a couple years ago and never used it. The Roku does all the web streaming I want, and the TiVo covers over-the-air broadcasting.

Right now I’m hung up on “full-array local dimming” and the E-series has 12 zones, the M-series 64 zones, and the P-series 128. The price difference at Best Buy is $999, $1,499, $1,999. The M and P have a VA panel, which CNET prefers, but they don’t know what kind of panel the E-series has. The M-series comes with a 720p tablet, and the P-series a 1080p tablet, meaning I’m spending hundreds for something I won’t use.

This makes me completely rethink HDTVs. Fancier sets want to replace Roku/FIre/Apple TV boxes, and even A/V receivers. They want to be our only device – and that makes sense for some people. But I prefer Roku over WebOS or Tizen. People have 4K content now because of Roku 4. I’m realizing it’s the Roku box that’s #1. It just needs the perfect display. I’m even rethinking my TiVo.

The TiVo lets me record over-the-air shows. But I mostly record the nightly news, some PBS documentaries, and old movies and TV shows from the 1950s. There are other sources for that content. I could jettison the TiVo and outside antenna and simplify my setup even more. However, I want to keep the Denon receiver and 5.1 speaker system. I play Spotify music, via the Roku, into the Denon, and it sounds fantastic. So the Roku provides both great video and great music. Plus I use it with The Great Courses Plus for lectures and learning.

When I take things apart like this, I realize I only want an HDTV set to be a monitor for the Roku. I was leaning towards the Samsung because it has a breakout box for all its connections. But the Denon A/V receiver does that.

I have to wonder if smart TV features will go the way of 3D. On the other hand, some people have always liked all-in-one combo units, like stereos with turntable, CD, tape drive, receivers housed in one case, or TVs with built in VHS/DVD players. I’ve always liked stereo component systems where I can upgrade each feature separately.

2 thoughts on “Buying a 65” TV in 2016 and Avoiding Smart TVs”

Ah, what TV to buy, a first world problem I had every couple of years while I was working….
I’d think you are getting too hung up on the ‘cost’ of the tablet and need to forget about it. If the screen is worth the price they are asking then get it. It sounds like you need to view the M and P series side by side and make a choice.

Good point Paul. But now that I’m retired, I’m super-careful how I spend my money. I justify spending money on a TV because it’s my window to the world. I will never get to travel to all the places I see on TV, so that’s why I want my TV screen to be larger and accurate.